Beauty is inherently political.

This week’s readings explored self-work through plastic surgery and explored how the world of cosmetic surgery plays into the wider social and political factors that govern our society. A really interesting idea for me was the question raised in the Self Esteem reading of whether or not cosmetic surgery violated the Hippocratic oath, asking if the risks involved in the surgeries and procedures actually provided healing.

I feel like the answer to that question can vary so much depending on the reasons behind it. For babies born with a cleft palette, to not have the reconstructive surgery to fix a slight anomaly in their upper lip means years of torment and ridicule for being born against the standard definition of an acceptable look. The idea of a procedure like that makes the risks seem worth it. In other cases like that of Justin Jedlicka, the “Human Ken Doll,” does turning yourself into a human doll really make him feel better about himself? Whose to say? The beauty of the industry is that you can reconstruct yourself into the most idealized version of “you” possible. Is this vanity? Or just conforming to the notion that when you look good (by your own standards) you feel better about yourself? I feel like the world has gradually made a little silicone pump or botox injection so acceptable because we are a society that recognizes physical appearance as an outward manifestation of who you are on the inside.

I’ve existed on both sides of the debate for Natural v. Enhanced and have come to the conclusion that at the end of the day it’s your life and your body. You’re the one who wakes up in the morning and sees yourself, and quite frankly if there isn’t something you like, then change it. That doesn’t necessarily mean go for cheek implants and 15 units of botox off the top, but do what you can so that you can live your best life for yourself.

We’ve become so afraid of a little sag in our chest, or a wrinkle around the eyes because of our society’s obsession with staying young forever. The procedures that work to slow or even reverse the effects of the passage of time can only do so much. Regardless, the obsession is there, and technology is only getting better. I’m genuinely curious to find out just how far we will take this trend.

Like this:

Related

maxfield331

6 thoughts on “Vanity or Necessity?”

I definitely agree with you that not all plastic surgery operations hold the same implications, as you discussed when contrasting cleft palate surgeries vs. the “Human Ken Doll.” However, I think it is important to consider further the difference between these procedures, as I agree that the two are not very comparable despite the fact that both involve altering one’s appearance.

When I first read your post, I immediately thought back to our recitation’s discussion of intersex children, based on our reading from a few weeks ago. During the discussion, we debated the ethics of parents electing certain procedures—in this case, sex reassignment procedures—for their children before they are old and mature enough to decide on their own what is best. This connects to cleft-palate surgeries, in a way, because they are also performed on babies and young children. However, at the same time, one cannot discount the medical reasonings behind the procedure. While cleft-palate surgeries are likely performed in part to avoid bullying and ridicule, as you mention, the cleft palate can induce various medical risks such as difficulty feeding, dental problems, and speech difficulties, to name a few. Thus, I don’t view cleft palate surgeries as cosmetically based, since such a large part of the decision is to prevent medical problems for the child. And, in connection to my previous point, I believe it is completely ethical in this situation for parents to make the choice to remove their child’s cleft palate since it is so medically based.

The “Human Ken Doll,” on the other hand, is entirely based in cosmetics, as Justin Jedlica’s quest to become “100% plastic” is purely meant to achieve the look of a plastic doll. At the end of the day, I agree with you that people should feel comfortable undergoing cosmetic surgery if that is what they desire, although it is important to consider where these desires come from, as we have been doing in class. Additionally, it is important to be aware of the medical risks associated with cosmetic surgery, as some procedures can be dangerous or even life threatening. In the case of Jedlica, he once agreed to a procedure to remove his forehead veins despite the high risk of going blind. In contrast with cleft palate surgeries, which are performed to improve one’s health, it is crazy to consider the medical risks that some go to to achieve their ideal appearance.

I, like you, was also very intrigued by the question Edmond posed regarding the ethical ambiguities in cosmetic surgery. The examples of cosmetic procedures you provide highlight the diversity of reasons for cosmetic surgery. While I do agree that cleft palate repair can, in some cases, be a preemptive measure against medical risks, electing cleft palate repair for the sake of avoiding ridicule has similar implications to the case of the three-year-old boy with Down syndrome in Lyon’s text. I understand the two cases are significantly different. The cosmetic procedures performed on the boy were completed solely for the purpose of normalizing his appearance. That said, I do think a deviation from what is considered normal is also carried into the decision for cleft palate repair. The latter procedure is much more prevalent than the former, possibly due to the fact that cleft palates are not considered a disability, and is seen as malleable. Preventing ridicule as the justification for cosmetic surgery relates to the idea that cosmetic surgery can rid a person of their psychological ailments, which rests on the neoliberal idea that self-esteem is the agent for a better you—a better life. Often, the medical community regards certain procedures as reconstructive rather than simply cosmetic; nonetheless, both are agents for the normalization of bodies to different degrees.

I find it quite interesting that certain medical procedures, such as Down Syndrome facial reconstruction and cleft palette surgery, are performed to make people have a more “acceptable look.” I think that to a certain extent, all plastic surgeries intend to create a more normalized aesthetic. I do agree that each individual has the right to determine whether or not they want to undergo such changes, however I think that plastic surgery is incredibly harmful because it works aggressively to erase the presence of “the other.” If people continue undergoing cosmetic procedures to correct features that they believe make them appear less “normal” and less “beautiful”, then we, as humans, are never able to get to a place of true ethical encounter. We will never truly know how to react to people who look different or “ugly” if we are never exposed to them. The lack of representation of “the other” results in unfamiliarity in how to deal with these individuals and an even more narrowed ideal of what it is to be beautiful. I am reminded of Weber’s piece, “Makeover TV” because in a sense, plastic surgery is just an act of self-modification used to ensure one’s placement in society. By becoming more “normal,” people feel more of a sense of belonging and more of an interconnectedness. It is incredibly harmful however, because these beauty ideals and the transformations that people are undergoing are matters of gender, race, and class as well. Therefore, only the most privileged (ie. white, upper class) are able to belong to this “elite” community of the “beautiful” and “normal.” I think we need to learn how to deal with that which we classify as not normal and ugly, otherwise we will never learn.

I think that the question of how far we will take it at the end of this post kind of refers back to the Tyranny of Normal reading that we had a few weeks back. The way that plastic surgery has increasingly dominated our modern culture just leads you to wonder how much further we will take things to strive for an impossible goal of normality. And if the end goal really is to reach normal and these people undergoing surgeries to obtain a normal look are doing so through botox, implants, ect. then does that make their altered look the new normal? Where does that leave everybody else? In twenty years if you don’t have a body and face like Kim K will you be seen as abnormal? I think it could be agreed upon fairly commonly that the Kardashian/Jenner look is not one of normality today. I mean how often do you see someone who looks like that on the street? Is that going to become the new standard, because if you look on instagram or any social media for that matter you can see how people with these almost cartoonish features gain immense popularity, and increasingly the number of people who look this way increases. If I like my thin lips and popsicle stick body does that mean I have to be considered abnormal in the future? Even if looking around today in this moment I can see women who look like me around every corner?

I thought a lot about the concept of self-esteem vs. vanity after class. after writing my paper on Instagram, the notion that something as trivial as Instagram ‘likes’ could temporarily give me a fake boost to my self-esteem reminded me of Alexander Edmonds argument in “The Self Esteem in which the Ego Awakens”. He describes one advertisement in particular, which encourages patients of a plastic surgery clinic to “raise your breasts and your self-esteem”. This correlates with the patterns we notice on Instagram, in which the less clothing the woman is wearing, or the more seductive the pose, the more ‘likes’ it will attract. If ‘likes’ are translating into a temporary self validation or esteem boost, then what this advert is claiming will in fact come true. Naturally, Edmonds and myself are talking about different aspects, one psychological and one materialistic; however my apprehension comes from the way I see these two aspects slowly merging into one via social media, and how social media is beginning to truly psychologically affect the way we view ourselves.

I agree on the idea of living with your body, in the sense that you make it what you choose to. If you find beauty in your body’s natural appearance and that is your prerogative, however, if you choose to take the more artificial crowds of beauty standards and that is also okay. I believe that with the power of owning your own body image you can find true happiness is what you make it. Conforming to what other people believe you should look like and how you should exemplify your beauty is completely detrimental to one’s personal psyche. We are often taught them on official enhancements to our bodies is seen as an easy way out from taking the time to work on enhancing your bodies appearance naturally. The ideology of artificial enhancements like plastic surgery, Botox, reductions, etc., being a source of vanity is a bit extreme. Some people find their release and areas in building the body in the mail. They believe they can feel beautiful to themselves and to the world if they look a specific way and they believe that they can only achieve this look is by plastic surgery. There is absolutely nothing wrong with how you build your body as long as you’re building your body safely, healthily, proudly, boldly, and most importantly happily.

Search

Search for:

Text Widget

This is a text widget, which allows you to add text or HTML to your sidebar. You can use them to display text, links, images, HTML, or a combination of these. Edit them in the Widget section of the Customizer.